[reh321]

I am optimistic the focusing will be better and if that is the case I will upgrade the camera. The K-1 has the poorest focus of any digital camera that I owned even worse than cameras made 17 years ago (Minolta DiMAGE 7). I have taken several pictures that are out of focus with the K-1. The same cannot be said for the Minolta DiMAGE 7 that I had and the Nikon D70 and Nikon D300. All my train pictures were in focus with those cameras.

What kind of "train pictures" do you take. I got into photography as a hobby via my hobby watching trains, so a high proportion of my pictures are "train pictures", even now; my techniques were mostly developed taking "train pictures". Even with my K-30, I can think of very few "train pictures" that were out-of-focus.

[Rico]

I'm upgrading my K-1. Can't say no to better low-light raws.

Adam from what I am seeing from my upgraded K-1 is not only are the RAW files much better at all ISO's the RAW files respond much better to normal post processing. I haven't had much time to use the upgraded camera but my initial impression is that I don't have to fight against the file in post processing like I did with the files from the K-1. Where I see this really coming into play is converting higher ISO images to B&W.

[normhead]

I change every day, but right now, I'm sticking with my K-1. A K-1 mkII might be better, but the K-1 is still a great camera. But then I've never bought a mkII camera from Pentax, so I'm not the target market.

For me it's "a little bit better than more than good enough."

[drache]

Adam from what I am seeing from my upgraded K-1 is not only are the RAW files much better at all ISO's the RAW files respond much better to normal post processing. I haven't had much time to use the upgraded camera but my initial impression is that I don't have to fight against the file in post processing like I did with the files from the K-1. Where I see this really coming into play is converting higher ISO images to B&W.

Looking at some of the dpreview articles Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade?: Digital Photography Review and a lot of side by side comparison images of the K-1 / K-1ii I see loss of detail by the smoothing effect on the K-1ii RAW images. In many cases the image looks better, but also many they look worse. Have any of the firmware updates to the K-1ii allowed disabling processing of RAW sensor data?

Not having touched a mkii, but having found a lot of detail out of raw images on my K-1, i feel there are going to be a lot of shooting conditions that will be enhanced by the K-1ii and some that will be better under the K-1.
I'm not sure that is a bad thing. A lot of people saying backup vs prime for the old and new may find they swap their primary body depending on their shooting style and conditions. If there is an option to remove processing from RAW to the point you get similar RAW images on both bodies, I would see no reason not to upgrade.

I am likely missing some things here, but I use a large mirrored 1,100mm F11 M42 lens that is silly grainy that seems to lose definition if the camera is doing any processing but using RAW really brought out the detail. I was doing mostly sky photography though.

I am glad to hear sales are good, many people wanting to upgrade, increase sales and conversions and re-assert the FF Pentax body was a good investment for Ricoh. I would also like their next FF variant to have 4K support because I like having a damn-near waterproof video camera

One thing that bothers me on most of the reviews vs. other brands is the afterthought on costs, if they are talked about at all. The K-1 is an amazing piece of hardware for a good price. It is also one of the few bodies that allow you to use very old, or funky, or adapted glass (with infinity zoom and adapters with glass required) with most all of the features intact (metering and focus peeking are my top).

[Rico]

Looking at some of the dpreview articles Pentax K-1 II Review: A worthy upgrade?: Digital Photography Review and a lot of side by side comparison images of the K-1 / K-1ii I see loss of detail by the smoothing effect on the K-1ii RAW images. In many cases the image looks better, but also many they look worse. Have any of the firmware updates to the K-1ii allowed disabling processing of RAW sensor data?

Not having touched a mkii, but having found a lot of detail out of raw images on my K-1, i feel there are going to be a lot of shooting conditions that will be enhanced by the K-1ii and some that will be better under the K-1.
I'm not sure that is a bad thing. A lot of people saying backup vs prime for the old and new may find they swap their primary body depending on their shooting style and conditions. If there is an option to remove processing from RAW to the point you get similar RAW images on both bodies, I would see no reason not to upgrade.

I am likely missing some things here, but I use a large mirrored 1,100mm F11 M42 lens that is silly grainy that seems to lose definition if the camera is doing any processing but using RAW really brought out the detail. I was doing mostly sky photography though.

I am glad to hear sales are good, many people wanting to upgrade, increase sales and conversions and re-assert the FF Pentax body was a good investment for Ricoh. I would also like their next FF variant to have 4K support because I like having a damn-near waterproof video camera

One thing that bothers me on most of the reviews vs. other brands is the afterthought on costs, if they are talked about at all. The K-1 is an amazing piece of hardware for a good price. It is also one of the few bodies that allow you to use very old, or funky, or adapted glass (with infinity zoom and adapters with glass required) with most all of the features intact (metering and focus peeking are my top).

I have looked over and downloaded the files from DPR and found no evidence of "smoothing" or "loss of detail" people claim to see. I have yet to see anyone show me where this is happening. What I have seen is people mistaking color noise for more detail for the K-1, D850 and A7RIII.

The files my upgraded K-1 is delivering the K-1 without the Accelerator Unit could never manage. For the upgrade price of $550 will save me a lot of time in post processing.

[madbrain]

What kind of "train pictures" do you take. I got into photography as a hobby via my hobby watching trains, so a high proportion of my pictures are "train pictures", even now; my techniques were mostly developed taking "train pictures". Even with my K-30, I can think of very few "train pictures" that were out-of-focus.

I don't take train pictures, but I own both a K-30 and a K-1 II . The difference in rate of out-of-focus shots in significant. On static subjects during daytime, it is practically 2% on my K-1 II, and even that has more to do with user error. I set my camera to "shutter priority", and turn off the focus beep completely for candid shots. Sometimes, I can't tell if focus has really happened or not, especially when refocusing nearby.

[GMounk]

What kind of "train pictures" do you take. I got into photography as a hobby via my hobby watching trains, so a high proportion of my pictures are "train pictures", even now; my techniques were mostly developed taking "train pictures". Even with my K-30, I can think of very few "train pictures" that were out-of-focus.

reh31: I take the typical type of picture rail buffs take. The pictures I take typically roster shots, but I also take scenic train pictures in remote hard to reach areas, where I have to us my kayak. I have had issues when a train pulls into the yard and is slowing down. I tend to take most of my pictures however, in an area south of Duluth Junction in Fort Frances, where they don't go all that fast. I still get the odd picture the is slightly out of focus when I take pictures in that area, but that has to do with me and not the camera. I find it focuses pretty good when trains are going around 50mph, but still get the odd out of focus picture, possibly because a train was changing speed. I now focus the camera on spots before I take the picture, and that seems to have helped a lot. I also turned off the shake reduction, and that seems to have made a difference. The shutter speed I use is 1/500.

[gaweidert]

Well, I have had my K1-II for almost two months now. All in all I am very happy with it. The shutter shake issue is not as bad as on my K1 and well controlled by the shake reduction system. This is a big plus for me. The added features work as advertised and I try to keep ISO below 200 whenever possible so. Any differences I see between the cameras I can usually attribute to me. Looking at one shot from a recent trip to Yellowstone I noticed a loss of detail at a higher ISO in one set of shots. I figured that I made those shots with my K1-II. It turns out they were made with my K1. No plans to upgrade my K1 as money is budgeted for other things and the cameras is great as is.